But why is it such a common feature in this kind of anti-gentoo-trolling that patches are not upstreamed to the appropriate projects by gentoo devs? Is there a grain of truth in this? Or is it just prejudice?

Hrm, no, that one's definitely not true. Dunno where that idea comes from. Patches are always sent upstream. Quite often upstream ignore them, don't provide valid contact information or don't read their own mailing lists, but the patches are always sent...

On the other hand, yes, we have a small group of vocal idiot users who go around using -ffast-math, -msse, reiser4, love-sources and hard-masked gcc versions on non-test systems giving the rest of the project a bad name. It's to be expected...

users who go around using -ffast-math, -msse, reiser4, love-sources and hard-masked gcc versions on non-test systems giving the rest of the project a bad name. It's to be expected...

Well I say, let them do what they want. Better to let the bugs be found now than after something goes unmasked. GCC 3.4 for example. Most stuff now compiles cleanly under it probably as a result of the GCC 3.4 thread in this forum. People found the crashes and sent the patches to bugs.g.o.

I've been running GCC 3.4 since the day it came out (in a separate slot than GCC 3.3) Whenever something fails during the compile I go through several steps to confirm it was GCC 3.4 and if I determine the cause, I check Bugs.g.o and if it isn't there, file a bug report.

I've shot myself in the foot several times as a result of getting too experimental with Gentoo, but I have the mental capacity to trace things down and eventually figure them out.

If I were running a business with Gentoo servers of course I'd never enter ~arch territory or do anything wierd with my flags. (I'd probably even lock my cflags on pentiumpro -O2 or at the most, pentium II)

So who is using wierd stuff on non-test systems?

As for servers, well my firewall/fileserver at home has been running a redhat 7.2 varient for over a year and I'm only now considering upgrading to something newer because of a recent power failure has caused NFS to refuse all clients (which luckily is just my laptop and I can SCP anything I need anyway)_________________Inspiron 4100 & Sun UltraAXe
Portage on Solaris|Dell Laptop Hacks
The way you feel about organized religion is the same way I feel about organized socialism.

Well I say, let them do what they want. Better to let the bugs be found now than after something goes unmasked. GCC 3.4 for example. Most stuff now compiles cleanly under it probably as a result of the GCC 3.4 thread in this forum. People found the crashes and sent the patches to bugs.g.o.

Sure. Use gcc 3.4 in a chroot system (or a seperate test box if you're rich and brave). Nothing wrong with that, it's the correct way to test things. It's the people who run it on live systems and go around suggesting that everyone else does the same ("because it's really stable") that cause the problems.

(incidentally, gcc34 is still massively buggy on some non-x86 archs... can't compile glibc on sparc for example)

"With othert distro's when you have problems they are problems with Redhat or with SuSE or with Lindows. But if you have problems with Gentoo you have problems with Linux."
-eh, if the context was system set-up, then i'd agree a bit more. from mandrake i learned that i didn't know anthing about how mandrake had set things up. i couldn't get the rpm managemnt thing to install packages not on the cd, and frankly i blamed mandrake instead of linux -- after all it was more of a distro specific "what did this thing do?" issue.

On the other hand, yes, we have a small group of vocal idiot users who go around using -ffast-math, -msse, reiser4, love-sources and hard-masked gcc versions on non-test systems giving the rest of the project a bad name. It's to be expected...

You hate anything experimental or bleeding edge don't you? SOMEONE has to use it for it to be tested, don't complain about them. I used love-sources for months without problems, and the only reason I am not using it now is for my radeon support.

You hate anything experimental or bleeding edge don't you? SOMEONE has to use it for it to be tested, don't complain about them. I used love-sources for months without problems, and the only reason I am not using it now is for my radeon support.

On the other hand, yes, we have a small group of vocal idiot users who go around using -ffast-math, -msse, reiser4, love-sources and hard-masked gcc versions on non-test systems giving the rest of the project a bad name. It's to be expected...

I do not understand...how is -msse a flag that is considered "experimental"? Haven't SSE instructions been around for a while?

[It's the people who run it on live systems and go around suggesting that everyone else does the same ("because it's really stable") that cause the problems.

There was one thread that was started for the GCC 3.5 testing. And one guy just comes in and starts asking all these questions about should he try the 3.5pre homemade ebuilds and just tons of questions and then mentioned he was using 3.3.2. I asked him why he was even considering 3.5 without even venturing into 3.4._________________Inspiron 4100 & Sun UltraAXe
Portage on Solaris|Dell Laptop Hacks
The way you feel about organized religion is the same way I feel about organized socialism.

It's not in our vocabulary over here (England). So it got me thinking about its etymology. Did the term come about because most of the souped up cars are Asian in origin, hence made by 'rice eaters' therefore ricers ?

It's not in our vocabulary over here (England). So it got me thinking about its etymology. Did the term come about because most of the souped up cars are Asian in origin, hence made by 'rice eaters' therefore ricers ?

Someone regardless of ethnicity with any vehicle regardless of type that put money into the cosmetics of their vehicle instead of performance and treats it as though it will beat anything it up against.

Given the above, and that the funroll-loops author clearly isn't using the word in the context of attacking asian people, I think we can all put our torches and pitchforks down now.

Y'know, one could set up a funny site in similar style insulting Debian. Comb through the debain-legal arcives, take a bunch of choice "comply with our arbitrary demands or we'll drop your project from main and spread FUD about your license on slashdot" quotes (totally out of context, of course), and post them on a bright red page next to pictures of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Ho Chi Minh, and other communist dictators.

I was going to do it, but then I decided sinking to their level isn't the answer...

Y'know, one could set up a funny site in similar style insulting Debian.

I think that was my point -- and that of the people who replied after me to that thread on debian-user.

wdreinhart wrote:

I was going to do it, but then I decided sinking to their level isn't the answer...

The person who made that site is no more representative of the Debian community than the quotes on the site are of the Gentoo community. Actually is he even a Debian user? It seems everyone has just assumed he is, fogive me if I missed a bit where he says he uses Debian or something.

I do not understand...how is -msse a flag that is considered "experimental"? Haven't SSE instructions been around for a while?

Ah, no, -msse is just silly. Set -march instead, let the compiler decide what to do.

i have msse and mmmx in my cflags along with -march=pentium4 and i haven't had any trouble. the only app that i had that crashs is gaim at random intervails with msn plugin active.(which i don't count atribute to the cflag)

i have msse and mmmx in my cflags along with -march=pentium4 and i haven't had any trouble. the only app that i had that crashs is gaim at random intervails with msn plugin active.(which i don't count atribute to the cflag)